It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UN: Credible evidence Iran working on nuke weapons

page: 1
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 12:01 PM
link   

UN: Credible evidence Iran working on nuke weapons


news.yahoo.com

VIENNA (AP) — The U.N. nuclear agency said Wednesday it is "increasingly concerned" about a stream of intelligence information suggesting that Iran continues to work secretly on developing a nuclear payload for a missile and other components of a nuclear weapons program.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 12:01 PM
link   
For those of you whom have eagerly waited to find out who we're going to free next, I submit Iran. How you reckon we'll pay for it? More taxes, continued printing money or both?
You know the intelligence sources have to be reliable. I can't help the sarcasm. Israel has been looking for a reason to take Iran on, and we'll back them up.

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Hillbilly123069
 


Yes... it always seems to be the Energy Cartel (one of the Military Industrial Complex puppeteers) to determine who needs 'freedom' brought to them via bloodshed.

I just wish they'd send their own family members to die in the attempt instead of ours.

As for the nuke business.... I can't help but think... "Yeah, them and a dozen other countries..."



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Hillbilly123069
 


Iran better hurry up before they have their share of "mass protests" and "humanitarian intervention". Iran wouldn't be stupid enough to fire a nuke if they ever finish - its being built purely for deterrence.

We saw what happened in Libya. If Gaddafi never gave up his nuclear plans in 2003, he wouldn't be hiding in a cave today being bombed by his former NATO partners in business.

edit on 2-9-2011 by CasiusIgnoranze because: .



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by CasiusIgnoranze
reply to post by Hillbilly123069
 


Iran better hurry up before they have their share of "mass protests" and "humanitarian intervention". Iran wouldn't be stupid enough to fire a nuke if they ever finish - its being built purely for deterrence.

We saw what happened in Libya. If Gaddafi never gave up his nuclear plans in 2003, he wouldn't be hiding in a cave today being bombed by his former NATO partners in business.

edit on 2-9-2011 by CasiusIgnoranze because: .


Evidently, we have someone who actually recalls history.... Good point!



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by CasiusIgnoranze
reply to post by Hillbilly123069
 


Iran better hurry up before they have their share of "mass protests" and "humanitarian intervention". Iran wouldn't be stupid enough to fire a nuke if they ever finish - its being built purely for deterrence.

We saw what happened in Libya. If Gaddafi never gave up his nuclear plans in 2003, he wouldn't be hiding in a cave today being bombed by his former NATO partners in business.

edit on 2-9-2011 by CasiusIgnoranze because: .


Star and quoted again for truth.

GM



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 01:02 PM
link   
I personaly think that the next place will be Syria, been an increasing number of news articles on Syria, and many being paralel to the Libya articles a few months ago before it kicked off there.

I read this article earlier today on Syria



EU steps up Syria sanctions with ban on oil imports


www.bbc.co.uk...

Seems to me that they may be trying to cut off countries that supply Iran, certainly wouldn't surprise me



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Egypt. Done
Libya. Done.
Syria. Next.
Iran. Get warmed up, you're on stage soon.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Trolloks
 


That's so genius evil, first they put on an embargo, so they push up the oil price again, profit, than they make a war, make more profit, get oil cheaper, again more profit, while the price at the pump stays the same, and even more shed-loads of profit.

All is fair in the name of greed.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Don't believe a word of it! Not at all! They will outright lie in pushing this.

"Stream of intelligence suggesting that..."



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
I was considering posting a link to this story in the Deconstructing Disinformation forum but decided to use SEARCH instead.

I'd ask that you carefully read the linked article (in the OP) again. Take note of the grammar, spelling and construction of the "article". My 9th grade daughter could write a more well-rounded piece.

I'm not ripping this apart merely because of the grammar/spelling nazi in me but merely to point out that if we're (meaning society) are to take these allegations seriously, don't you think they would have published a more polished article?

To me, it looks like it was rushed and put together simply with sound-bites and buzz-words meant to incite ire but YOU be the judge.

I'll highlight a few points here with emphasis added by me in bold italics


The U.N. nuclear agency said Wednesday it is "increasingly concerned" about a stream of intelligence information suggesting that Iran continues to work secretly on developing a nuclear payload for a missile and other components of a nuclear weapons program.


"suggesting". Not proven. Not concrete. Not confirmed. Suggesting.


In its report, the International Atomic Energy Agency said "many member states" are providing evidence for that assessment, describing the information it is receiving as credible, "extensive and comprehensive."


Sounds great. Um...exactly WHAT is the evidence?? C'mon guys. Don't leave us hangin. Babies removed from incubators? Mass-public-executions? Burials at sea?


Enrichment can produce both nuclear fuel and fissile warhead material...


"fissle"? Can someone explain to me what "fissle" is?




It also denies secretly experimenting with a nuclear weapons program and has blocked a four-year attempt by the IAEA to follow up on intelligence that it secretly designed blueprints linked to a nuclear payload on a missile, experimented with exploding a nuclear charged, and conducted work on other components of a weapons program.


"charged". Did this reporter even attend college?
Secondly, knowing what "other components" might be helpful in either selling this story or calling complete BS on it.




In a 2007 estimate,, the U.S. intelligence community said that while Iran had worked on a weapons program such activities appeared to have ceased in 2003. But diplomats say a later intelligence summary avoided such specifics, and recent IAEA reports on the topic have expressed growing unease that such activities may be continuing.


There's another key-word, "estimate". Not fact. Not proof. Not a daily-double trifecta. A "guess" if you will.
Also what's with the punctuation or lack thereof. (hint: there should be a comma between "program" and "such")




The phrase "increasingly concerned" has not appeared in previous reports discussing Iran's alleged nuclear weapons work and reflects the frustration felt by IAEA chief Yukiya Amano over the lack of progress in his investigations.


Alleged. Again. Sort of like my inference that the author of this article is "alleged" to have gone to journalism school. My proof however, is very evident. (simply read the article)




His report said the increased concern is due to the "possible existence in Iran of past or current undisclosed nuclear related activities" linked to weapons work. In particular, said the report, the agency continues to receive new information about "activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile."

Acquired from "many" member states, the information possessed by the IAEA is "extensive and comprehensive ... (and) broadly consistent and credible," said the report.


Information about what and by whom? You have no problems citing the exact nature of the concerns or activities allegedly taking place but the WHO is kept hidden from view? Let me take a guess. Someone from a little group called PNAC perhaps?


Again, I have a very hard time taking this "report" seriously given the shoddy construction, vagueness of the information presented and let's also not forget....the TIMELINESS OF THE REPORT - 9/11 much? !!!



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   
not surprised Iran would seek a deterrent.. especially since they sit in the heartlands at the Eurasian crossroads..

I'm also sure all sides would like to be the ones who control the area (with or without the oil)



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by FOXMULDER147
 
you forgot North Korea, for they too were on the axis of evil hit list, bush made up, he left of Pakistan,China, and parts of South America, two or three i can think of.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by TXRabbit
 
you do know any one can be a reporter? Now all you have to do is, some thinking and knowing how to use word per, right, and post. Spelling and facts are optional, speel check ewill help only if you pay attention to detail. Someone will buy it, and there your are, a reporter. You don't even have to be present, just search, copy, rewrite, and in what you think the reader would read, post it on the web, and sit back and wait for the $$$ to roll-in. Nice to know the real world of web.
Back to the post...
Iran would use the nuke on Israel, i do think they are in the stages of making one, say by Dec- Jan, my itchy toe says so, as far as using it, not till Israel says they are in the final stages of the temple, for this is the Big slap in face to all Islam. There can only be one temple on temple mount, if and when Israel starts building one there, the foundation work as far as i know has not began, but then would they say so.


edit on 2-9-2011 by bekod because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
I have to admit


In its report, the International Atomic Energy Agency said "many member states" are providing evidence for that assessment, describing the information it is receiving as credible, "extensive and comprehensive."


Does this mean that the "many member states" claim the information is credible? Or is it the IAEA that declares it "credible"? Also... just so it can be openly asked....

What "evidence" is there... or are we - those who will be sent in to die in a war - not to know - sort of like ... other wars where "credible" and "indisputable" evidence were similarly marketed to the world?

Considering the likely outcome of open acceptance of the claims made; shouldn't we demand "not to be fooled again."?

And furthermore, if they do develop a weapon (as North Korea is said to have done) what business is it of ours to force them into submission? Please spare me any political answers, since this is ultimately about life and death.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 02:41 PM
link   
There is also credible evidence, as in what we see almost daily, that the US doesn't use it's arsenal for peaceful purposes, or intends to, and there's also evidence, such as going into Iraq in the first place, that we ignore the UN when it fits our agenda to do so.

So we are going to enforce rules on Iran which we ourselves don't follow? We have a right to have 3000K+ nuclear warheads, Israel has 1000K's of nuclear war heads, as well as Russia and China, and Iran can't have one?


So why do the world powers get to set their own set of rules for themselves, enforce other rules on less powerful nations which they themselves don't follow, and people still act is if we're the good guys and only have positive intentions? People in here buy this crap too. Unbelievable.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by MysticPearl
 


I had heard - although it may have been political blather - that Israel has about 300 warheads.... were you being dramatic... or is there a source for the number you mentioned?



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Why does Iran want a nuclear bomb? Why does Ahmadinejad continue to threaten Israel?

...the answer is simple to remain RELEVANT

Ahmadinejhad wouldn't dare use a nuclear bomb on Israel they would wipe Iran off the face of the earth. This is all hype we are listening to the political version of Flavor Flav, he knows if his country can't provide something to continue being mentioned on the world stage than they will be the next Kuwait or Georgia or Azerbaijan there but irrelevant.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Hillbilly123069
 


Like I should trust the UN
I believe Irans prez when he says nukes are not being developed but he does want nuclear energy. According to him nukes are nothing but trouble, also, what has anyone with nukes gained? Not much but fear & troubles. He says nukes are a thing of the past & today's weapons are information.

I do think Iran should give up on a nuclear energy plan & lead the world in alternative energy, like solar. It's time for any nation to start the change.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Egypt. Done
Libya. Done.
Syria. Next.
Iran. Get warmed up, you're on stage soon.


Agreed, except I would add some words:

Afghanistan: Done & looted
Iraq: Done & looted.
Egypt. Done & beinglooted
Libya: Done & being looted
SyriaL Next, etc.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join